Maybe I could comment, but David and Paul will probably want to comment as well.
We've lobbied, and we've lobbied hard. The one hurdle we haven't gotten over with our lobbying—and this has been the case for a number of years—is that we can do way more with the same amount of money in the pot. If you're going to open an office in one country, you have to close one somewhere else.
Again, what I would like to think is that in the corporate world, what you talk about is building. As you grow, you expand your spending. It's not logical that the staff in Foreign Affairs, every budget, is being told that if they're going to open an office here, then they have to close one over there. What we should be asking is how fast they can grow. Based on how fast the trade increases, their budget will go up accordingly. But that isn't the way the Government of Canada has looked at this.
The government doesn't look at it as an investment. It's almost like a social program. There's this much, and you can spread it around the world however you want. But there's usually no reward for being successful. That's a fundamental issue that has to change if Foreign Affairs is going to have the budget it needs to do what business is requesting. That's a hurdle and a lobby effort that we have not succeeded in up to this point.
The budget has to increase and you have to reward success. If an operation is growing in a region, then that budget should automatically be increased to reflect that. Why? Because the return on that investment is coming back to the Canadian taxpayers very directly, and that return is measurable.